Adaptation

In the nights I've not been running out to see Zappa or putting together documents for the FTO, I've been doing my interpreting thing for the Japanese Film Festival again. This year's Q&A session featured Akira Ogata, the director of 'The Milkwoman'.

During the Q&A, Akira pointed out that it is really difficult to pitch an original concept in Japan right now. If you go into any of the studios or production companies and say, "this is an original story," it immediately becomes a tougher sell, regardless of the budget or scope. Of course in Australia, we have no such problems because our market is far from saturated with Australian stories, anything will do - But that is another rant.

This year's Japanese Film Festival featured quite a number of adaptations and 'based on a true story' type fare. The hit movie 'Tokyo Tower' which played to a packed house was an adaptation. It's not just Japan where we are seeing this trend; The world trend this decade is deeply conservative, starting with the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy as well as the Harry Potter series of films. They are now following up with 'Narnia' and 'Golden Compass' as full-blown series-based franchises, both based on books.

This year I've seen the third installment of the following franchises:

• Spiderman


• Ocean's 11


• Pirates of the Carribean


• X-men


• Bourne Identity

I've been telling people the thing I've seen the most in cinema this year is the number '3'. Apart from the absurd adaptation of characters from a amusement park ride that is 'Pirates', all these films have been adaptations of some kind, if not a remake of a previously succcessful project.

You can see that a project with an in-built audience is always going to be far more attarctive to invest in than a project that you cannot determine the appeal to a wider audience until yopu make it. If every film is a prototype product, then it is understandable that an executive might want to cover his ass by saying "look, it's a hit book!"

Where is all of this going to go in the future?

Quite simply, the movie business is retreating into a position where it won't develop new characters or stories. It's going to expect book publishing and comic books to do that hard work and the movie business will pilfer the intellectual capital from other industries. It's mightily slack if you ask me.

Maybe it is the way to go in a business sense as you are minimising risk. After all, it's not everyday that you get to establish a raft of characters like in 'Star Wars', or even Indiana Jones. seeing that these films cost so much to make, why would you risk that capital in something that has not been proven? And just look at the box office receipts of the adaptations! They do very well indeed,

The downside of course is not only that it reduces screenwriters to adaptation specialists and ths destroys the foundation of creativity in your own business, but also reduces the significance of film as an art form in the long term. Indeed, how important an art form could it be if it lets others take the risks and gambles in developing new ideas?

This is not a good trend at all when one considers it. Cinema may be in its decadent phase where we can supply all the form and style in the world thanks to digital effects, but none of the function and therefore substance of its own. That would be a shame.